User talk:Khawaga

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Libcom logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Libcom logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{fact}} tags in Lolcat article

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please don't remove {{fact}} tags in articles, as you did in this edit to Lolcat, without replacing them with a valid source or providing a rationale about why you don't think there needs to be a source. Thank you, Politizer (talk) 20:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I did check the end-of-sentence references when I first added the tags, but at least one of them (I don't remember which off the top of my head) did not seem to be directly referencing the information earlier in the sentence. The main reason for the tags is that there were footnotes there before and the URL in those footnotes died, so I am hoping someone can replace those footnotes with another suitable source. —Politizer^{( talk | contribs )} 01:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NationMaster

Just to let you know, NationMaster is one of a number of sources that mirror wikipedia. If you look carefully at [1] it says so at the bottom of the page "The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL." Nil Einne (talk) 08:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propaganda model

The dispute surely ended when the offending (plagiarized) material was removed from the section? Dynablaster (talk) 01:34, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May I propose a solution then? If the criticism is low quality, simply remove it. End of dispute. And if someone restores it, I will back you up. Dynablaster (talk) 17:41, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kämpa tillsammans!

The article Kämpa tillsammans! has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable Swedish communist group which seem to be mostly synonymous with a small blogging collective that has gone inactive since 1,5 years. No references to indicate notability, little mention in third-party online sources, article has remained an orphan since 2008.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tomas e (talk) 16:45, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]